I added Beck's Tube map, since it was referred to but not shown, both because it is significant in the history of the London Underground, but also because it shows the extent of the network in 1933 at the moment it was taken over by the London Passenger Transport Board. However, this change was reverted. So I have come here to discuss it. The image was taken from the Harry Beck article and is quite low-def. I do not see the issue with using it here and think people will find it quite useful. So what's the objection? LastDodo (talk) 13:33, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- The restrictions on using Non-free content like this in articles are quite strict. It's appropriate for Harry Beck, and also Tube map (surprisingly wasn't there already, I just added it) which directly relate to this specific map and include extensive commentary on it. However just adding it in the history part of this page felt a bit tenuous. If the intent here is to show the extent of the network in 1933, it would be better to create a new map showing that. It could be done at a more useful resolution too. the wub "?!" 16:06, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- I can read the rules about non-free content but am not familiar enough with their application to know what the right thing is here. Are you confident about this? Would it really not be considered fair use? I mean this article is about the London Underground, of whicb Beck's map is both a part, and a useful means of showing that history (the extent of the network). Can you imagine anyone at TFL actually objecting to the use of the map on the wikipedia page for the London Underground, of all places? I am not going to go create some near identical map which would only be based off his anyway. I would be interested in what other people think about this. LastDodo (talk) 17:47, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- The WP:NFCCP criteria are strict. You must satisfy all ten main criteria, including all five sub-criteria. None of them are optional. As for TfL, if you can persuade them to release the Diagram of Lines under a free-use license, then great. Otherwise, we follow non-free rules. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:30, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- Just as a thought, is the Beck map still in copyright? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 16:42, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- Yes. In the United Kingdom, copyright remains for 70 years after the death of the author (commons:Help:Public domain#Copyright terms by country). Harry Beck died in 1974 so it remains under copyright until 2044. {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs}} 17:10, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- But it was commisioned by LT who would own the copyright which would expire 70 years after first publication, ie 2003. Also material commissioned or originated by a government body is available under a Creative Commons license? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 17:13, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- Although Beck was an employee of UERL, he was acting as a freelancer when he submitted the design. Our article Tube map#Beck's maps shows that he was paid a total of 15 guineas (£15-15-0d) for the designs - but did the transaction include the transfer of copyright? If not, it will have remained with Beck and subsequently, his estate. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:07, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- The book doesn't mention it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:10, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- According to this article, he signed over the copyright. However, I'm not sure that matters for when it expires. I believe it is still 70 years after his death, in 2044. LastDodo (talk) 14:44, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- It would be 70 years after he signed over copyright, if that was to a corporate entity, If he signed it over to, eg, his wife, it would be 70 years after her death I believe, Murgatroyd49 (talk) 16:20, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about that. this page makes no reference to such a rule. LastDodo (talk) 16:50, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- Both your links come up with page not found. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 17:09, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- When I was working as a freelance, any work I produced remained the copyright of the company commissioning it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 17:11, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, but the expiration date would be 70 years (or whatever it is depending on the type of work) after your death. Also I fixed the links, sorry about that. LastDodo (talk) 17:14, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- I never had the copyright, it always belonged to the relevant company. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 17:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- Did the company ask you to produce the work? If so, they're justified in including a clause in the contract that gave them the copyright. In the case of Beck, it was entirely his own idea: he worked on it in his spare time, and the first that the UERL knew of it was when it was almost complete, and he took it along to the publicity department. Garland's book makes it clear that Beck continued to work on amendments for some time afterwards, usually without being asked to do so. For example, one of his drafts (not taken up by the London Transport Executive) was to add the Victoria line as a straight diagonal, using lilac as the colour. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:21, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- Aha:
When I recently signed a form assigning the copyright of this design to the Board, it was not merely understood, but was promised, that I should continue to make, or edit and direct, any alterations that might have to be made to the design. This practice has been followed without exception since 1932.
- Letter from Beck to Christian Barman, dated 2 June 1938, quoted in Garland (p. 32). So Beck did transfer the copyright, no later than 1938. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:44, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
- Good find! Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:24, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not sure it makes a difference. The article above on copyright makes no mention of who owns the copyright being a factor in how long it lasts. From that it seems it will last until 70 years after Beck's death, and that would apply whether or not he held on to the copyright and even if he had never held it. LastDodo (talk) 11:47, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
- According to HMG Works made by the Crown or an officer or servant of the Crown in the course of their duties (e.g. an employee of a Government department): 125 years from creation.
- 50 years from commercial publication, if published within 75 years of creation. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:55, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
- I dont think Beck would count as a Crown employee. The map was first published in the first two months of 1933, while the London Passenger Transport Board was only established in April 1933. Also the LPTB was not full nationalisation anyway. LastDodo (talk) 15:14, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
- In what sense was it not full nationalisation? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 16:23, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
- Because there were still privately-owned shares in the new organisation. See London Passenger Transport Board#History, last paragraph, and London Passenger Transport Board#Further history, last paragraph. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:42, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
- So if we are right, the Beck map would still be copyrighted, which means the rules apply. And if Redrose64 and others are saying the criteria are not met, I don't have the knowledge or wherewithal ro argue.
- I have found an alternative which is this map which is from 1932, so pretty close, though of course not in the diagrammatic 'Beck' style people are familiar with. It is by Fred H Stingemore, who died in 1954 , which means the copyright expired in 2024. Of course I'd rather have the Beck map, because it is mentioned, it is famous, it is from 1933 and because it is in a style readers will be familiar with, meaning it is much easier to compare to present day maps. But there we are.
- Alternatively someone could contact TFL and ask permission. Yes, of course I could do it, but its a bit above and beyond for me when it comes to wikipedia editting. LastDodo (talk) 11:09, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
